MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

35,577/- invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. While doing so, the AO rejected the contention of the appellant that in the assessment year 2008-09, in the assessment made pursuant to the order of remand made by the Hon'ble High Court, no addition was made by the AO on the same payment. The appellant

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,CIRCLE CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

35,577/- invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. While doing so, the AO rejected the contention of the appellant that in the assessment year 2008-09, in the assessment made pursuant to the order of remand made by the Hon'ble High Court, no addition was made by the AO on the same payment. The appellant

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

35,577/- invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. While doing so, the AO rejected the contention of the appellant that in the assessment year 2008-09, in the assessment made pursuant to the order of remand made by the Hon'ble High Court, no addition was made by the AO on the same payment. The appellant

MM IMPORT AND EXPORT,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THODUPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mm Import & Export .......... Appellant 709E, Avoly Panchayat, Adooparambu Muvattupuzha, Ernakulam 686661 [Pan: Aaofm2699B] Vs. Ito, Ward-1 & Tps, Thodupuzha .......... Respondent Appellant By: ------- None ------- Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 26.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Noida [Cit(A)] Dated 31.03.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Export & Import Of Timber. The Return Of Income For Ay 2013-14 Was Filed On 30.09.2013 Declaring Nil Income. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Ito, Ward-1, Thodupuzha (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Vide Order Dated 12.12.2016 Passed U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) After Making Addition Of Rs. 4,19,849/-

TDS provisions invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The AO also made addition of Rs. 35

M/S ATHAZHAKUNNU MAPPILA L.P. SCHOOL,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD TDS, KANNUR

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shrisanjay Arora & Shriabyt.Varkey

section 200A(1) of the Act even as there was, prior to 01.6.2015, no provision for the said levy while processing a TDS return u/s. 200A(1) of the Act, which 1 ITA Nos. 911& 912/Coch/2022 (AY 2014-15) Athazhakunnu Mappilla L.P. School v. ITO came on the statute only by Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. from that date. The issue

M/S ATHAZHAKUNNU MAPPILA L.P SCHOOL,KANNUR vs. ITO ,WARD TDS, KANNUR

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shrisanjay Arora & Shriabyt.Varkey

section 200A(1) of the Act even as there was, prior to 01.6.2015, no provision for the said levy while processing a TDS return u/s. 200A(1) of the Act, which 1 ITA Nos. 911& 912/Coch/2022 (AY 2014-15) Athazhakunnu Mappilla L.P. School v. ITO came on the statute only by Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. from that date. The issue

MOHAMMED TARIQ THAIMADATHIL,KOCHI vs. THE ITO , NON CORP WARD 1(5), KOCHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year : 2014-15 Shri. Mohammed Tariq Thaimadathil, Vs. Ito, Tariq Manzil, Elmkunnapuzha Road, Non Corporate Ward – 1(5), Kaloor, Kochi. Cochin – 682 107. Pan : Abrpt 7993 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Parvathy Ammal, Ca Revenue By : Shri. K. Jayaganesh, Senior Ar. Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.08.2024 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav:

35 has explained the cause of delay and pointed out that the order of Ld CIT(A) was sent via email to the assessee, which mode of service has been refused by the assessee in From-35 and hence there was a delay in filing the appeal before us. 3. The learned DR opposed the prayer of the assessee

HI-LITE BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOZHIKODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2009-10

section 139”. The assessee also submitted that though the amendment made effective from 01.04.2010 it is retrospectively applicable as it is curative in nature. The CIT(A) did not agree with the contention of the assessee and accordingly upheld the disallowance by relying on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thomas George Muthoot

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT,TDS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

Section 10 of the IT Act. 5 AAAAL0822C LBS CENTRE 64,44,687 No proof submitted for non- 644,469/- FOR SCIENCE deduction of Tax at source. AND TECHNOLOG Y Total 15,16,688/- Accordingly demanded TDS of Rs. 15,16,688/- along with interest u/s. 201(1A) of the Act of Rs. 13,22,784/- vide order dated

M/S.FCI OEN CONNECTORS LTD,COCHIN vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 1(3), KCHI, COCHIN

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Anil Kumar Dugar, Jm

35,520/- and as a result, there was short disallowance, i.e., 30% of the said amount, u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Ld.ITO. In view of such an omission and no enquiry made by the Ld.ITO in connection with said short deduction of TDS, the Pr.CIT set aside the assessment order dated 24.12.2019 with directions

THOMAS CHACKO,KOCHI vs. THE DCIT KOCHI CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

35,054/-. The Revenue could hardly dispute the clinching expression used in the Act in sec.80A(2) reads “The aggregate amount of the deduction under this Chapter shall not in any case, exceed the gross total income of the assessee.” Meaning thereby, that 3 Thomas Chacko there is no such stipulation of restricting the deduction claim to the extent

SRI.THOMAS CHACKO PROPRIETOR OF GROUP MUKKADAN,KCOHI vs. ACIT , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

35,054/-. The Revenue could hardly dispute the clinching expression used in the Act in sec.80A(2) reads “The aggregate amount of the deduction under this Chapter shall not in any case, exceed the gross total income of the assessee.” Meaning thereby, that 3 Thomas Chacko there is no such stipulation of restricting the deduction claim to the extent

SRI.THOMAS CHACKO PROPRIETOR OF GROUP MUKKADAN,KCOHI vs. ACIT WARD-2, KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

35,054/-. The Revenue could hardly dispute the clinching expression used in the Act in sec.80A(2) reads “The aggregate amount of the deduction under this Chapter shall not in any case, exceed the gross total income of the assessee.” Meaning thereby, that 3 Thomas Chacko there is no such stipulation of restricting the deduction claim to the extent

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

35, 4th Floor, Commissioner of GCDA Commercial Income Tax, Complex, Corporate Circle Marine Drive, 1(1), Cochin, Vs. Cochin Kerala – 682 031. PAN: AAACC9658B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Gopi K, CA Revenue by : Shri Omanakuttan, Snr. AR Date of Hearing : 02-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23-09-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER These are the appeals

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

35, 4th Floor, Commissioner of GCDA Commercial Income Tax, Complex, Corporate Circle Marine Drive, 1(1), Cochin, Vs. Cochin Kerala – 682 031. PAN: AAACC9658B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Gopi K, CA Revenue by : Shri Omanakuttan, Snr. AR Date of Hearing : 02-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23-09-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER These are the appeals

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

35, 4th Floor,\nGCDA Commercial\nComplex,\nMarine Drive,\nCochin,\nKerala - 682 031.\nPAN: AAACC9658B\nAPPELLANT\nAssessee by\n:\nShri Gopi K, СА\nRevenue by\n:\nShri Omanakuttan, Snr. AR\nDate of Hearing\n:\n02-07-2025\nDate of Pronouncement\n:\n23-09-2025\nORDER\nPER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER\nThese are the appeals filed by the assessee challenging the separate

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

35, 4th Floor, Commissioner of GCDA Commercial Income Tax, Complex, Corporate Circle Marine Drive, 1(1), Cochin, Vs. Cochin Kerala – 682 031. PAN: AAACC9658B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Gopi K, CA Revenue by : Shri Omanakuttan, Snr. AR Date of Hearing : 02-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23-09-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER These are the appeals

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

35, 4th Floor,\nGCDA Commercial\nComplex,\nMarine Drive,\nCochin,\nKerala - 682 031.\nPAN: AAACC9658B\nAPPELLANT\nThe Deputy\nCommissioner of\nIncome Tax,\nCorporate Circle\n1(1),\nCochin\nVs.\nRESPONDENT\nAssessee by : Shri Gopi K, CA\nRevenue by : Shri Omanakuttan, Snr. AR\nDate of Hearing : 02-07-2025\nDate of Pronouncement : 23-09-2025\nORDER\nPER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER\nThese

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK,THRISSUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri Sandeep Singh Karhailthe South Indian Bank Limited, Head Office, Mission Quarters, Tb Road, Thrissur Kerala - 680001 ............... Appellant Pan : Aabct0022F V/S Dcit, Circle – 1(1) & Tps ……………… Respondent Thrissur, Kerala

section 154 of the Act, the assessee filed the application dated 16/04/2015 seeking rectification on the following grounds: – “1. Total income considered in the order generated by the system amounts to Rs. 268,45,53,626/- As per the manual tax calculation sheet enclosed with the order as well as our workings, total income amounts to Rs.268